Cisco Support Community
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Community Member

H-REAP Question

Hi all,

On the Cisco doco it is mentioned that to get  H-REAP 'local-switching' up and running a separate WLAN is required so we can do

the vlan mapping. From my understanding, there are two ways to tackle this.Either to have WLANs with separate

SSIDs or to have different security polcies configured on a single SSID.

What I am aiming is to have a single SSID for the entire deployment so at this stage option would be the only choice.

Just wondering wondering whether anyone had any unpleasant suprises with the approach.

Under release notes for 7.0 code it lists Cscth02374 which states that central switching TCP performance is better than local switching which kind of defeats the whole purpose of local switching at remote office.Wonder whether anyone has experienced performance issues with local-switching.



Cisco Employee

Re: H-REAP Question

Hi Janesh,

I don't understand what you are referring to.

You can have a single SSID on your WLC. You enable it for h-reap local switching.

Then the "local mode" APs will simply centrally switch it and the h-reap APs will locally switch it.



Community Member

Re: H-REAP Question

Hi Nic,

Many thanks for your reply.

Let me elaborate more.

The first portion/para of my question explains what I intend to achive.

I know this is achievable as per doco and you also re-confirmed it.So no problem there

In the second portion of my email, I'm highligting Cscth02374 bug, which states that "local switching performance is poor in comparison to central switching"

So the issue still remains, whether enabling H-REAP will cause a negative impact on switching performance.

If its the case, it will be a problem  for me as I intend to implment H-REAP in 200 remote sites.
As the 7.0 code can support a max of 20 H-REAP groups, I'm not implementing any H-REAP group configurations.

Let me know your thoughts.



Hall of Fame Super Silver

Re: H-REAP Question

I have clients running v7 along with H-REAP and have no issues at all regarding performance.  Dropping traffic locally would seem to be less of a performance issue than having traffic tunneled NFL to the WLC and then having traffic sent back to the wireless device. I understand you found a bug I'd, but  my clients do not have any complaints.  Hope this helps.

Posted from my mobile device.

*** Please rate helpful posts ***
Cisco Employee

Re: H-REAP Question

Bug details :


Hreap local switching does poor compared to Hreap central switching. With hreap      \
central switching on iperf with 5 stream tcp, if we get 90 Mbps, the same with       \
local switching produces 68Mbps.


In HREAP local switched mode, AP is doing AMSDU instead of AMPDU which is the        \
reason for lower throughput

The bug is marked as "internal", so no one ever faced it in a TAC case. However, I guess people don't notice a throughput of 68Mbps instead of 90 ...



Please rate answers that you find useful

Hall of Fame Super Silver

Re: H-REAP Question


When they did this test, were they using an AP that was local and then changed it over to h-reap.  The reason I ask, is that if the AP is at a remote site and services are local to that remote site (usually the reason you need to do h-reap), you will see a difference in iperf especially if the WAN is slow.  That is why I think nobody really sees or notices a difference.

*** Please rate helpful posts ***
CreatePlease to create content